Search results

This research paper aims to determine the factors needed to propose a platform where waqf (Islamic endowment) organizations can collaborate with government public hospitals to develop corporate waqf hospitals. Consequently, the elements of governance and sustainability are included in the management of corporate waqf hospitals thereby leading to the corporatization of public hospitals.

This study adopts the qualitative research methodology and undertakes content analysis of data collected from journal articles, magazines and official websites. Data analysis involves open coding with NVivo 12.

General findings from the literature review have shown that architectural and engineering fundamentals were essential factors in the success of past waqf hospitals of the era between 8th and 14th centuries. In that era, the decentralized waqf-based hospitals employed the mutawalli (the trustee/manager of the waqf assets) to govern the administration of the hospitals. Present corporate waqf hospitals can exploit the elements identified from past waqf-based hospitals and additionally adopt the private-public partnership model in the form of a muḍārabah (profit-sharing contract) agreement to design a sustainable waqf governance model for Malaysian public healthcare services.

The proposed platform is designed for a corporate waqf model developed in collaboration between Malaysian waqf institutions and public healthcare services. It abides by both the Malaysian fatwa (Islamic rulings) on waqf and the laws of the Malaysian Government.

There is potential for developing the Malaysian corporate waqf-governance healthcare model which will enable the hospital to provide better quality healthcare to more patients through upgrading the quality of equipment used in hospitals and/or better facilities at equal or lower costs. Consequently, this will not only improve waqf management and distribution but also result in reduction of government expenditure.

This research promotes the concept of a corporate waqf hospital which will provide innumerable beneficial healthcare services in terms of improved healthcare quality at affordable costs to the general public and at no cost to the poor and the underprivileged.

Although waqf has played an important role as a vehicle for Islamic financing in the society for centuries, a model of collaboration or partnership of waqf with public healthcare services has yet to be explored and developed. With proper corporate governance and well-managed sustainability in a corporate waqf model, this newly developed partnership between waqf institutions and public healthcare providers can be a first step in many more interesting collaborative arrangements that can be established between waqf institutions and public services in the future.

This paper aims to examine the factors that affect the quality of healthcare services in the implementation of the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) at the local level in Ghana from the perspectives of health policy implementers and beneficiaries in public-private organisations.

This paper has adopted a mixed research method with both qualitative and quantitative data, with in-depth interviews, document analysis and focus groups discussions. A total of 107 participants took part in the interviews and the questionnaire survey.

The study found that these factors greatly affect the quality of healthcare services from the implementers’ perspectives — referrals, effectiveness in monitoring, timeliness, efficiency, reimbursement, compliance with standard guidelines of Ghana Health Service (GHS) and accreditation process. For the beneficiaries, three healthcare services factors are important, including medical consultations, diagnostic services and the supply of drugs and medicines. Some other factors are found to be the least prioritized healthcare services, namely the issuance of prescription forms, verification of identification (ID) cards and staff attitude. However, the study found that implementers and beneficiaries exhibited a mixed reaction (perspectives) on accessing some healthcare services. In some healthcare services where the implementers perceived that beneficiaries have more access to such services, the beneficiaries think otherwise, an irony in the perspectives of the two actors.

This paper adds to the extant literature on the perspectives of policy implementers and beneficiaries on factors that affect the quality of healthcare services in general and specifically on the implementation of NHIS in Ghana with the public-private dimension.

The purpose of this paper is to review the causes of long waiting time in Hong Kong public hospitals and to suggest solutions in the service, organisational, systems, financial and policy perspectives.

The paper is a review of waiting time of public hospital services. Total joint replacement, which is one of the elective surgeries in public hospitals, is presented as a case study.

The average waiting time of semi-urgent and non-urgent patients in the accident and emergency departments of public hospitals is two hours, and that of specialist outpatient (SOP) clinics is from 1 to 144 weeks. For total joint replacement, it is from 36 to 110 months. Measures like Government subsidisation programme for the replacement surgery and employing adequate physiotherapists, Chinese medicine practitioners, clinical psychologists and nurses to reduce the waiting time are suggested. Issues concerning the healthcare system of Hong Kong, such as structural reform, service delivery model, primary care, quality and process management, and policy reviews, are also discussed.

The ‬over-reliance of public services has resulted in long waiting time in public hospitals in Hong Kong, particularly in the emergency services and SOP clinics. However, the consequences of long waiting period for surgical operations, though much less discussed by the media and public, can be potentially detrimental to the patients and families, and may result in more burdens to the already stretched public hospitals‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬.

The unprecedented SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has further constrained the budgets of governments worldwide for delivering their much-needed infrastructure. Consequently, public-private partnerships (PPPs), with the private sector's investment and ingenuity, would appear to be an increasingly popular alternative. Value for money (VfM) has become the major criterion for evaluating PPPs against the traditional public sector procurement and, however, is plagued with controversy. Hence, it is important that governments compare and contrast their practice with similar and disparate bodies to engender best practice. This paper, therefore, aims to understand governments' assessment context and provide a cross-continental comparison of their VfM assessment.

Faced with different domestic contexts (e.g. aging infrastructure, population growth, and competing demands on finance), governments tend to place different emphases when undertaking the VfM assessment. In line with the theory of boundary spanning, a cross-continental comparison is conducted between three of the most noticeable PPP markets (i.e. the United Kingdom, Australia and China) about their VfM assessment. The institutional level is interpreted by a social, economic and political framework, and the methodological level is elucidated through a qualitative and quantitative VfM assessment.

There are individual institutional characteristics that have shaped the way each country assesses VfM. For the methodological level, we identify that: (1) these global markets use a public sector comparator as the benchmark in VfM assessment; (2) ambiguous qualitative assessment is conducted only against PPPs to strengthen their policy development; (3) Australia's priority is in service provision whereas that of the UK and China is project finance and production; and (4) all markets are seeking an amelioration of existing controversial VfM assessments so that purported VfM relates to project lifecycles. As such, an option framework is proposed to make headway towards a sensible selection of infrastructure procurement approaches in the post COVID-19 era.

This study addresses a current void of enhancing the decision-making process for using PPPs within today's changing environment and then opens up an avenue for future empirical research to examine the option framework and ensuing VfM decisions. Practically, it presents a holistic VfM landscape for public sector procurers that aim to engage with PPPs for their infrastructure interventions.